Table 1.
Background data and test performance of the developmental prosopagnosics.
Fig 1.
Examples of the stimuli used in the Object Decision Tasks.
Upper panel: three versions (full drawing, silhouette, and fragmented) of a real object. Lower panel: three versions of a chimeric nonobject (half a wolf and half a donkey).
Table 2.
Group data and statistics from the object decision tasks.
Table 3.
Single case data from the object decision tasks.
Fig 2.
Scatterplots showing the relationship between performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Task and the object decision tasks with silhouettes (left panel) and fragmented forms (right panel) in the DPs.
Also shown are the regression lines, the Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and their associated p-value.
Fig 3.
Examples of the face and house stimuli used in the perceptual matching task.
'Sim' designates similarity level with each stimulus differing from the one presented in the boxed area by 1 difference (Sim 3), 2 differences (Sim 2), 3 differences (Sim 1), and four differences (Sim 0).
Table 4.
Group data and statistics from the perceptual matching task.
Fig 4.
Scatterplots showing the relationship between similarity level and mean % correct responses to different trials in the six conditions of the perceptual matching experiment for the developmental prosopagnosics (DP) and the control group.
Similarity increases parametrically from level 0 to level 3, with 0 indicating minimum similarity with four differences and 3 indicating maximum similarity with only one difference. Also shown is the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and its associated (one-tailed) p-value.
Table 5.
Single case accuracy in the perceptual matching task.
Table 6.
Single case RT (ms) in the perceptual matching task.